How do we know what is and isn't real?

I'm not certain sex has anything to do with it what I'm saying is this is the perceptual the nature of the perceptual equipment we have to work with it is simply a degree of understanding the functions of being human being Homo sapiens sapiens

 

I don't know what you're on about, however one part spirit, one part physical sensation is a dualist claim.

 

actually your claim of dualism I didn't say human being in two parts I said they represent tasting and knowingtwo commual elements of process not have dual nature but represent biological feedback loop

 

how do we know what is and is not? we don't. but we do know, that we can stub our toes, if we don't pay attention to where we are going.
we do know, statistically what happens more and less often. and what happens more and less often when what other things happen first.
that much we know, and we know that through science.
granted science only knows what is known, but what is not known, is NOT KNOWN.

 

There is the known, the unknown, the knowable, the unknowable, and the who-cares-to-fucking know it.

 

It does make sense--I also agree and believe that consciousness is similar to light, and exists at light speed.

Let me clarify something though:

In my suggestion, it doesn't matter which way you face, because the Now is a matrix that stretches clear across the universe---it is a 3-dimensional hologram---it lacks depth (as holograms do) but it is 3 dimensional in that it appears to face in all directions---but that is how we see it---in actuality it would be of the 4th dimension so it actually surrounds our 3 dimensions (each higher dimension represents an infinite number of new points in a new direction. Consider a 2-dimensional world--let's say the 2 dimensions are up-down and back-front. What that 2-D world would see of ours is an infinitely small sliver of it---because it has no side-side dimension (or left-right if you will). But that side-side dimension surrounds the 2-d world in all directions. The Now is that infinite sliver of the 4th dimension that we can see in our 2-D world.

Does the 4th dimension exist in a physical sense—that the physical past still exists, cemented in time? That the future is already there waiting to be experienced? We cannot know. All that we can know for sure is that the physical does exist in that infinitely thin sliver of the 4th dimension we can perceive---the Now. It may very well be that only at that point does everything come together to create the physical 3-Dimensions of reality, the physical universe----or maybe not even that---maybe only the illusion of the physical 3-dimensions.

That ‘Now’ covers us in all directions clear across the universe, even though it is a photon-sized sliver of the 4th dimension---in fact I suggest it is not even that wide----but simply the width of the event horizon of each photon---interacting with physical mass at this moment of Now.

This idea by the way could explain the problem of entanglement---linkage between particles clear across the universe---where it seems that information is shared at faster than the speed of light. If the two particles are linked in the 4th dimension, in the sense that they are in the same matrix of Now---as this single Now stretches clear across the universe----it is not that information is shared across great physical distances, instantaneously, at greater than the speed of light, rather it is shared instantly in the same Now. A very poor metaphor for this (that doesn’t quite work but at least provides an idea of the concept) would be a film moving through a movie projector. The film represents a 2-D reality---each frame a thin sliver of a Now that is illuminated for a brief instant. In that brief instant a bulb illuminates the frame and seemingly instantaneously the image appears on a screen of which the distance away is possibly tens of thousands of times the width of that frame of film. The image on the frame and the simultaneous image on the screen are similar to entangled particles: It seems that there is an entanglement between a local particle and one a great distance away that defies physics. But in reality it is not so fantastic, rather it is just a link across the next dimension. Admittedly, one big difference is that if the frame represented a real 2-D world, they would have absolutely no concept of the image on the screen as it is completely out of their physical dimension. But in our case, the fourth dimension is not a physical direction, but a direction of time, which is why we can perceive it as simultaneous without time being a factor (i.e. it seems to occur at faster than the speed of light)----it is all the same Now----just as the image in the frame and the image on the screen are the same Now to that 2-D world of the movie.

Another way to say what you are referring to as ‘within relativity’ is, ‘to exist at sub-light speed,’ and the theory of relativity also works this out to be slower than the speed of time—it is the same thing. At the speed of light, time does not exist---past, present, and future all merge into one instantaneous point. At the sub light speeds, time and reality all manifest in a relative state.

At the speed of light, we can say that the physical universe does not exist---at best it is a mere instantaneous flash.

The implications of the Theory of Relativity appears to be, as you stated, that past, present, and future do physically exist. If we travel at a fast enough velocity, our relative age (time) slows down, which means that the time of the universe around us speeds up. Therefore it seems that when we travel at high speeds we are moving into the future, and since we would still experience the physical universe, then the future, it appears, physically exists.

But consider this—the theory of relativity holds that the speed of light is a constant no matter what speed you travel. It alone will reach you at the same speed whether you are sitting still, or traveling through space at 200 miles per second. This makes sense because you will always see the universe around you, i.e. you won’t move faster than your ability to see.

This means that your subjective experience of time stays the same. But if time stays the same, how can one move ahead in time. Mathematically, according to the theory of relativity, you are progressing through the 4th dimension a little more rapidly than the physical dimensions, but you are not moving in time in the sense of leaving our current time frame. Instead space-time is bending around you---but it is time that is bending more than space.

As you move at a faster speed, you still see the same universe, you still experience the same time as everyone on earth, you just experience it faster because you are ‘cutting corners’ by bending the 4th dimension. But you are still trapped in this 3-dimensional world. As you travel faster, your only view of the 4th dimension is still the Now. You still cannot see tomorrow or look back and see yesterday, so you are experiencing the same Now that everyone else experiences, it is just bending so that you experience it sooner, relatively, than anyone else.

Let’s take the example a little further. Let’s say that you stayed on earth and I am speeding through space to a destination that is 2 years away at 200 miles per second and then return to earth. Let’s say during that time, and because of my velocity I will only age 3 years by the time I return to earth (just as an example—I’m sure the actual math would produce a different time difference). If you watched my progress from earth, then at 3 years, you would be determining that I am still 1 year away from earth. Would it be correct for you to say at that point that I am not really there, but have jumped ahead in time and have already landed on earth in my present but your future? I suggest that such is not the case because over the year, you would continuously watch me get closer and closer to earth. Finally on the 4th year, you would meet me as I got off my ship. You are in the Now which took 4 years to reach, which is the same Now that took me only 3 years to reach. But I experienced the same 4 years of Nows as you did, because you never lost track of my ship. I never disappeared into the future, nor did I disappear into the 4th dimension I was there all 4 years, even if I experienced them at a 25% faster pace.

This does not mean that the future and the past do not physically exist. What I am saying is that all we can truly know is that the Now exists. Beyond that we have no way of knowing if there is a physical existence in the future or the past. However, if the future did exist physically, it may suggest that everything is predetermined.

I agree that the mind exists at the speed of light, perhaps as yet a separate dimension from light---a 5th dimension. But this puts us back to the problem—if light simultaneously exists in the past, present, and future---then mind in its purest form already knows the future—which must mean that from our mortal perspective, everything is already predetermined.

But as I explained in my previous post, anything outside of the Now is non-physical form----essence. Perhaps this form is what makes up the 4th dimension, shaped by mind. And if mind can shape it, then we, with our localized sub-light speed minds, can impact it as well, after all the entire experience of reality comes down to the subjective self. Individually we experience reality as the center of the three physical dimensions, and at the center point of Now, with a localized conscious that also is our own individual center. Space, time, and mind, in all of its dimensions, comes down to an individual center point of subjectivity. As you can see, I also agree with the localized mind. And in this sense, free will is still possible, and the only physical reality (or illusion of physical reality) may still be the Now.

 

if you don't know what is real how can you make statements about how what we know or what we don't know

 

Lady friend died in June. Best and oldest friend died 3 days ago. Seems real. Of course I could be wrong. A trick of light refraction?

 

Condolences, scratcho my friend.

 

Sorry to hear that man...

 

When you say photon sized sliver, Is this meant in a metaphorical sense? Because I'm pretty sure we getting bombarded by many particles in any given moment which we experience 'Now'.

I like the movie projector analogy.

Don't you have to perceive the whole universe as being conscious if you believe mind occupies it's own dimension?

I'm not sure how you might explain ultimate mind degenerating in our dimension to allow for say a chair, presumably an inanimate, non-conscious object.

Going juvenile for a moment, the idea of my poop being conscious is kinda funny.

 

Thanks brothers.

 

My condolences Scratcho

 

my inclination is to tell you that you're a part of that cubit
I wish I could say this without seeming unsympathetic. Those that loose their head for the dream of returning to our virgin state,
Will be restored to their wakeful state and never loose conscousness of loved one again. You will remember all that has been said to you.
those two I claim a recent affinity for now past, those being McKenna and Leary.

 

we work as a unit to bring your concept to fruition. I can't replace you upon you enough that we have all been in cahoots. we are the hippies psychedelic movement
, our tools are art writing, song and dance, the celebration of personal inspiration of all kinds. and f*** anybody that is jealous because we're having fun. You will lnow your brothers by recognizing the flower childre festval feel. You eiill respond as though they were long denied friends. everywhere is joy and celebration

 

My condolences as well, Scratcho. This is why my philosophy focuses on the subjective---it is not a matter of what is out there in the objective world, whether it is dead or alive----it is all about the subjective. You are a subjective entity, Scratcho was a subjective entity---or is a subjective entity even still------it is life that matters.

 

Yes, I think we are pretty much in agreement.

I see it in the sense that the same Now happens for each individual at the same time---the difference is that the perception of that Now is localized, and dependent on the distance from the objects of perception. For example, on a star 400 Million Light Years away, it is now at this same moment that it is now here, where I sit. If I could see the light from that star right now, it would be 400 Million years old, rather than the light of Now, yet that 400 Million year old light is part of my Now even if it is the same Now here and there—I just can’t see that Now there because of the distance. (It is this single Now clear across the universe in the 4th Dimension—that I believe enables entanglement to work.)

If it is all the same Now, then the question becomes, how can speed alter relative time. I touched on it before, but let me go back to that. We are bending the space-continuum when we speed up. When we try to conceptualize this we always think of it in terms of bending three-dimensional space. After all we see light from a distant star bending around a massive star in such a way that we can see stars behind the massive star. If light bends with space-time then we can conclude that the Now does as well. But what we forget to think about is that it must also bend the 4th dimension too. In fact that is how the geodesic math applied to the Theory of Relativity works---you have two legs to a triangle: time and space (velocity is the third). The faster we move, the longer the time leg becomes, and the shorter the space leg. In other words, the faster we move, we push (or bend) the three physical dimensions into the 4th dimension. We are experiencing the same Now, but we are covering more direction in the 4th dimension as we do that. At the speed of light, we have pushed the three dimensions to their limit and break through into the 4th Dimension.

It is this relative distance from object to observer and what you referred to as apparent ‘relative time’ that helps enable our perception of the universe as three dimensional. Therefore the matrix of Now is not determined by the point at which photons are emitted from their source (and remember that source may not even exist beyond the point of form—except for those places where it is touched (or we perceive to be touching it) in the Now). It is determined by those points at which the photons of the Now are absorbed.

Therefore the Now is, as the Double Slit experiment shows us, and as the scientific parable of Schrodinger’s cat tries to explain—the result of observation, or as Berkeley stated, esse est percepi---existence is perception. Reality is dependent on the subjective.

However I will return to your paragraph about the ‘flux’ and the Gestalt of an object standing out from its background (a concept which, by the way, is key to the etymological meaning of the word existence). (And see, it is not so mystical after all.) Let me just say though that I do not see the flux as formless---I see it as the realm of form---of essence. It is non-physical based on the second principal I put forth---that is, since we cannot see photons before they reach our visual senses we cannot say they are physically existent in the Now, which is all that we know truly exists. They are of a future realm, and exist as energy, but not in our physical realm. I equate form to Kant’s ding an sich---thing of itself.

But first:

Yes---metaphorical in the sense that I think the width of a photon would be too wide. It is in fact, in my suggestion---what I describe as the event horizon of each photon in a given moment of Now, or even more precisely, it is that point of initial collision between the event horizon of the photon, and the event horizon of the receiving particle---the moment of Now is the instantaneous collapse of all probability waves. Remember also that the light is largely waves, not just particles. But to be absorbed, it is in a single position, meaning that at that point it is a particle. Even though we are talking about all kinds of particles hitting us at any given time, there is a single layer of colliding event horizons in a single point of Now.

Also consider that everywhere light hits, it is absorbed. (Though matter is actually largely empty space, so there are also those particles that pass through.) Also consider that light is not even reflected (in the case of mirrors and shiny objects, or even just matter in light) as we perceive it---it is absorbed and then a new particle of light emitted.

Conveniently for me---I am an animist. Perhaps it is not the chair or the poop that is conscious, but rather the material that the chair or the poop is made of. I will explore this more in my next post.

But here is an alternative materialist solution to my theory of Now that may not require a conscious observer: Because the point of Now involves a photon being absorbed, it doesn’t matter if that photon arrived to that point as a particle, wave, or a wave/particle (ala Schrodinger’s cat)—at that point of Now, it is manifested as a particle with a position, because it is absorbed. Therefore in this alternative explanation physical reality manifests at that point of Now simply because of particle interaction. Or in quantum physical terms, there is a superposition of states, until the Moment of Now which represents a collapse of all probability waves, through the simultaneous interaction of all quanta (as that point or moment of Now).

However, I do not believe that such an explanation adequately accounts for all the variations on the double slit experiment, and it does not answer the question of how can conscious thought be transcendent of the Now.

 

And of this subjective entity it lacks no capacity to apprehend real things save for the temptation to qualify. The evidence of the body is not the only evidence we have for the existence of personality. For one we have the evidence that the experience of personality is wholly subjective. It becomes wholly familiar and completely recognizable when we don't attempt to qualify the expressions of others as representing anything other than our own in terms of the common experience of being human creature.